..and what are your thoughts about this?
2007-09-26 05:49:20 · 22 answers · asked by SophiaLeo 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
So, a teenager you are held responsible for their crime when he/she turn 18?
And at the same time they are not allowed to drink alkohol or sign a contract... the world is sick. Thank god I live in Europe.
2007-09-26 05:59:00 · update #1
Yes, they execute children everywhere. With the wars they decide to start and maintain. Vietnam and Iraq, for example.
2007-09-26 07:43:49 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 3⤋
Not now, according to wiki:
"Since the reinstatement of the death penalty in 1976, 22 people have been executed for crimes committed under the age of 18. 21 were 17 at the time of the crime, one, Sean Sellers, executed on February 4, 1999 in Oklahoma, was 16. The last person to be executed for a crime committed as a juvenile was Scott Allen Hain on April 3, 2003 in Oklahoma."
While the crimes were committed while juveniles, the sentence carried out after they became adults.
But they HAVE been in the past:
"The youngest person to be executed in the 20th century was George Stinney, at the age of 14, in 1944. The last execution of a juvenile may have been Leonard Shockley, executed on April 10, 1959 at the age of 17. "
If convicted of a crime that deserves this level of punishment, the law has no alternative but to institute it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_the_United_States#Ages_of_condemned_prisoners
2007-09-26 12:54:46 · answer #2 · answered by Yahzmin ♥♥ 4ever 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Some states used to.
There were some states that would execute offenders who were under the age of 18 when they committed the crime. But since 2005, that's been declared unconstitutional.
I will note that even when it was legal to sentence minors to death, the US didn't actually (in modern times) ever "execute children", as they would invariably have reached adulthood long before they exhausted their appeals.
2007-09-26 12:56:27 · answer #3 · answered by Teekno 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
This is strictly my opinion only ... But as far as I'm concerned, because if their inactivity with respect to issues like gun control and funding for cures for diseases, they are indirectly executing their own people in general. Imagine how much betterment would come from a trillion dollar investment in bettering society by curing diseases or even the exploration of the cosmos instead of a trillion dollar investment in war.
2007-09-26 12:57:01 · answer #4 · answered by Fedele 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The USA does not execute children. Unless you're a certain age, I think 17 but I'm not sure, they're not even tried as adults. I don't think children should be executed.
2007-09-26 12:56:04 · answer #5 · answered by Lacy 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
In the US, offenders who commit crimes before their 18th birthday cannot be sentenced to death. This is established in the US Supreme Court case Roper v. Simmons (543 U.S. 551 (2005)).
2007-09-26 13:03:25 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Never, the only thing that can happen is if they crime is severe and they are close in age they can be tried as an adult. To be honest we are way to lenient on children if you ask me.
2007-09-26 12:53:14 · answer #7 · answered by Zenkai 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In the past one young man was executed in the last 100 so years. But, no they don't anymore.
2007-09-26 12:53:53 · answer #8 · answered by 354gr 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If there was a 10 yr old Hannibal lector then yes they should
execute him or her.
2007-09-26 17:45:42 · answer #9 · answered by CrazyBeck 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes, millions. And without a trial. It's called Planned Parenthood.
2007-09-26 12:52:17 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋